Posted on 05/12/2016 5:42:08 AM PDT by ebb tide
VATICAN CITY - In an opening with historic import, Pope Francis has said he wants to study the possibility of ordaining women as deacons, a step that could for the first time open the ranks of the Catholic Church’s all-male clergy to women.
The order of deacons was reinsitituted in the Catholic Church following the reforms of the 1960s, and while deacons cannot celebrate Mass like a priest, a deacon can preach at Mass, celebrate funerals, and perform baptisms.
But in restoring the diaconate, the church also restricted ordination as a deacon to “mature married men” over 35.
Many protested that limitation, saying the earliest Christian texts also speak of “deaconesses” and arguing that the modern church should also allow women deacons.
Saint John Paul II and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI were both theologically conservative pontiffs who said that such a move was unjustified and could undermine the concept of the all-male priesthood.
But Francis said Thursday (May 12) he agreed the matter should be given more careful consideration, telling hundreds of nuns from around the world that he himself always wondered about the role of deaconesses in the early church.
“Constituting an official commission that might study the question?” the pontiff asked aloud in response to questions from some of the sisters.
“I believe yes. It would do good for the church to clarify this point. I am in agreement,” he said, according to an initial report from National Catholic Reporter.
“I accept,” the pope said later. “It seems useful to me to have a commission that would clarify this well.”
The devil will be in the details, of course.
As Francis’ own questions indicated, there are debates about who the deaconesses were and what they did.
Some will argue that deaconesses played a different role in the early church from that of deacons, an office established by the Apostles to focus on caring for widows and the poor so that the Apostles could focus on preaching.
That could mean that the papal commission could re-establish an order of female deacons that falls short of actual ordination.
Or the commission could say there is no justification for establishing the office of deaconess.
But whatever happens, the fact that Francis has opened the door to the debate and the possibility of ordaining women is groundbreaking.
This so-called "question" had already been clarified by one of his predecessors, a saint at that.
See bayard's post #31 on this same thread.
This pope is an apostate.
False. We know, for example, that St. John never married. He served as bishop of the church in Ephesus; if there were a "requirement" to be married, he would have fallen under it.
If the passage you're thinking of had intended to require marriage, it would have said "married". Instead, it says "husband of one wife," probably intending to exclude men who had remarried after divorcing a pagan wife or becoming widowed.
Finally, this is a caucus thread. Are you a Catholic?
This would go a long way towards futhering this hugely unhealthy trend of laicizing the clergy, and clericalizing the laity.
There is no theological reason per se why married men cannot be ordained. The Catholic Church-- East and/or West --- has always called at least some of its priests from the ranks married men.
Women -- that's an entirely different thing. Following the example of Our Lord, the whole Church --- East and West--- has always taught that Holy Orders involves a representation of Christ the Bridegroom; and the one thing a woman can't do is "embody" Christ as Bridegroom.p> Therefore women CANNOT be ordained through the reception of Holy Orders.
Not "We don't wanna." Not "should not." Not "ought not." CANNOT.
Deacons don’t have to be married. Where did you get that?
Deacons don’t have to be married.
Thank you.
Are you a Catholic? If not, are you in some other church where priests “must” be married?<p
Despire the precepts and example of both Jesus and St. Paul, that it would be a good thing for anyone who can, to remain unmarried as they were?
You’ve been all over the Amoris Laetitia threads; so don’t even try playing blind, deaf and dumb with me.
Thank-you.
In the airplane interview on the way back from the World Yute Day in Rio, Francis entertained the idea of giving Holy Communion to the divorced and remarried by emulating the schismatic Orthodox. Off the cuff remark? Maybe.
But less than three years later, he has since convened two rigged SinNods resulting in his papal exhortation, "Amoris Laetitia". Papal exhortations are not "off the cuff".
Keep believing in his "off the cuff remarks" and he'll lead you straight to Hell.
Let’s keep it as a study, then bury it, ping!
Amen to that!
Alas Babylon, yes, you are right. No, you are not a bigot but a prophet.
Why is Papa Tango digging it up?
I think that we know the answer to that.
My point is, the Pope said no such thing.
Oh yes, there was elision, there was insinuation, there was a quirky little footnote he says he can't remember writing, there was outright avoidance of direct questions on the subject ("Go ask Schoenborn, he knows theology") --- but canonical matters are not settled by winks and nods and forgettable footnotes.
That Pope Francis makes things so ambiguous that any knave can pinch the silly putty into the shape of their choice, is scandalous. It's gaslighting. I hate it. It drives me crazy.
But he did not say what he is alleged to have said: that the divorced/remarried may now receive Communion without definitively renouncing their present condition of adulterous union.
If you can demonstrate otherwise, do so. And please try to do it without further insults to me, personally.
Give it a try.
Thank you.
That's what makes it so weaselly and dangerous: it's everything by equivocation, nothing by declaration.
I stand by my statement and reject your accusation of a personal insult. The German and Philippine bishops have already recognized AL as free license to give Holy Communion to unrepentant adulterers, with no reprimands from the Bishop of Rome to date. Bergoglio had been doing the same since he was Archbishop of Buenos Aries. Since AL, Cardinals Schonborn and Kasper, and even Humble Jorge have all confirmed the evil intent of the footnote. If you can demonstrate footnote #351 of AL is in perfect alignment with the Church Magisterium, go for it.
Otherwise, stop hollering that black is white and up is down.
Footnote #351 does change discipline. Why will you not acknowledge the elephant in the room?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.